Recent Profile Visitors

8GB is ridiculous in this day an age, especially with current resource requirements for the latest apps and OS. I understand the need for cheap devices for those that either can't afford or don't require a flagship device but at what cost? Bad user experience is the number one complaint people register against Android and it's not the strictly the fault of the OS, it's the fault of the device manufacturers that poorly implement the OS, fail to keep it updated and use sub-par hardware to run it.
They might as well have put Gingerbread on it.

Quite a lot of phone for the money! What's it actually like build and lag wise? Screen in daylight? Viewing angles? Camera? Fingerprint reader any good, wiil it use marshmallow APIs when it becomes available or stick to proprietary solution? That enough? :P

Been following the leaks on this with quite some interest. I've never, ever wanted a Blackberry before...but a modern Android slider is right up my alley (loved my HTC Vision)! Personally, I'm over the fingerprint reader thing so not bothered about the lack of one - HTC screwed up once with the One Max, leaving an unencrypted bitmap of your fingerprint easily accessible to any app on the device, the fed's have just had ~5 million prints hacked, etc. etc., what are you supposed to do, burn them off your fingers when compromised? Anyway, kudos BB, hope the SD808 stays a rumor and it actually gets the SD820! Would have been nice if they had waited for Sony's 1/2.3" sensor to become available too...

It's not really about what you need, nor about comfort, it's about what the average human eye can perceive, which is 300PPI @ 12 inches....or 455PPI @ 8 inches. If you think you can see a difference, you are either in the minority that can see a difference (remember, we're talking averages here...) or you are just noticing the quality difference in the panel itself - which has nothing to do with pixel density or resolution. Small screens with high pixel density are a marketing gimmick pure and simple.

You seem to be taking things out of context to make them fit your opinion there - or is it to justify the money you spent on the TV? ;) If you've got a 42" 4K/UHD TV, you're sat 3 feet in front of it at all times and all you watch is videos of your kids that you've recorded in 4K/UHD then yes, for you, it's not pointless. Also, note that I said 'dodgy, 480p, Youtube vid' - implying low bitrates / crap encoding.

The whole 4k/UHD thing has been bugging me for a while now and ever since Sony announced the Z5 Premium with its (part-time) 4k screen (hell, QHD is bad enough!), I’ve felt a need to <rant>...and do some maths! On TVs, 4k is mostly pointless. In the UK at least, there is very little in the way of 4k content. Our broadcast HD content is 720p (or 1080i depending on how you want to look at it) and the vast majority of broadcast content is SD (576i). Even on a 720p screen, up-scaled SD content doesn't look great, worse at 1080p and at 4k, well, you get the idea. Until the vast majority of what you watch is 4k, keep away! Mobile devices are a bit different but essentially, 4k is still pointless. The UI can be native to the resolution so in theory, no ugly up-scaling. Same with photos and videos taken on the device but a dodgy, 480p, Youtube vid will still look sucky and even with native content, could your eyes really tell the difference in normal use? With small screen devices, it’s not so much a content issue, more of a question of perception. It’s widely accepted that the average adult human eye cannot distinguish beyond 300PPI (pixels per inch of diagonal display size) at an average reading distance of 12 inches, nor can it focus on objects closer than 4 inches. So if you had the Z5P, sporting 806PPI, 12 inches from your eyes, out of the 650,000 pixels per square inch on the display, 560,000 would essentially be invisible to you. That’s over 86% of the pixels that you can’t distinguish…but they still require battery and processing power. click to enlarge the image All you really need on a screen of up to around 5 inches, to get that average 300PPI @ 12 inches, is 720p resolution. If you like the screen a bit closer, say 8 inches, then 1080p is all you’d need for the same display size. For 4k, you’d need a 15 inch screen, held 12 inches from your eyes to give the same 300PPI equivalent. In the case of the Z5P, you’d need to hold its 5.5 inch screen 4.5 inches from your eyes to get the 300PPI equivalent – right on the limit of the average adult’s ability to actually focus! Now obviously, there’s an elephant in the room here: Virtual Reality. If you had something like Google Cardboard, a 4k screen might actually be of use. However, unless that’s the only thing that shiny 4k screen is going to be used for, the rest of the time it’s just a pointless waste of processing power and battery life. </rant>

4k is just another money making / marketing ploy / dick measuring contest. it serves no purpose in a phone, nor a tv really. the human eye can't even distinguish beyond 300PPI so the Sony's 806PPI is just pointless. people who think the screens look better are generally just noticing the better quality of the panel in general, resolutions doesn't really come into it. this is just like camera manufacturers and the "megapixel war". with that in mind, whilst i approve of the 1080p downscaling, i'd be pretty annoyed that my "all singing all dancing top of the range 4k phone" wasn't actually "doing" 4k, especially considering the price difference vs the std, 1080p Z5... (not that i'd be stupid enough to buy one in the first place ofc!). however, another side of me would be happy that they're trying to mitigate performance and battery issues - but at the same time, those issues wouldn't even be a factor were it not for the stupidly ott screen! wish LG did downscaling on the G4... (in the shipped roms).

When I first head about this I thought "here we go again, more cloud crap" but this, done properly (i.e. proper OS integration at all levels), actually sounds like a decent use of "the cloud". Regarding "normal" people filling up a 32GB phone - i'd say quite easily done. Especially in the advent of higher qual and res cameras - I have 20GB of phone camera pics/vids on my phone alone - spanning back a few years tho. It's nice to have them all there for times when you don't have internet and need to refer back to something.

but then what will the One's successor be called?
I think HTC One Mini would make the most sense from a marketing POV. Jump's on the One's bandwagon and uses Samsung's already recognisable 'mini' format.